2026-01-14 15:30:21

#比特币2026年行情展望 How will Bitcoin perform in 2026? Let's see what the institutions say

Recently, there has been an interesting divergence in institutional predictions for Bitcoin prices, reflecting the core contradiction in the current market.

The bullish voices are very confident. Institutions like Bitwise believe that under the triple drive of continuous ETF inflows, a rate-cutting cycle, and the halving effect, Bitcoin is expected to reach new all-time highs. Some analysts even suggest that the four-year cycle of Bitcoin has become invalid, shifting towards a long-term institutional allocation logic, with a target of $250,000. Their main reason is that inflows from sovereign funds and corporate treasury reserves will create an "irreversible tidal wave of funds."

But there are also voices that are cautious. Galaxy Digital's stance is relatively cautious, believing that by mid-2026, Bitcoin may fluctuate between $70,000 and $130,000, with both scenarios being quite probable. VanEck is more straightforward — 2026 could be a year of adjustment, and recommends investors adopt a dollar-cost averaging strategy to hedge against volatility.

What do these differences indicate? They show that the ultimate direction of Bitcoin still depends on two variables: the Federal Reserve's liquidity policy and the actual pace of institutional capital entering the market. Instead of fixating on a specific price level, it's better to focus on these two driving factors.

For most people, in the context of a "slow bull" becoming a market consensus, a dollar-cost averaging strategy remains a reliable way to navigate volatility and capture long-term trends.

BTC0,77%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

16 Likes

Reward
16
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

PaperHandSister

· 11h ago

Institutions are all arguing, which shows that no one has confidence. Instead of listening to them talk about 250,000 or 70,000, it's better to watch the Federal Reserve's stance. Dollar-cost averaging is the way to go.

View OriginalReply0

StakeWhisperer

· 11h ago

$250,000, just hear it out, don't take it seriously haha Institutions each say their own thing; in the end, it's still about the actions of the Federal Reserve and big funds. As retail investors, let's just stick to regular dollar-cost averaging. It's that time of year again for the harvest of retail investors. Will this time the script be played out early again?

View OriginalReply0

SignatureAnxiety

· 11h ago

$250,000 hahaha, how much can you boast about... But listening to the quarrel between Bitwise and Galaxy, I find it quite amusing. When will institutions finally see eye to eye? DCA (Dollar Cost Averaging), it's easy to say, but when the market drops 20%, how many people can hold on? Just asking. The real core is the Federal Reserve's hand; no matter how much ETF inflows there are, it all depends on Powell’s mood. I find the notion of a "capital tsunami" a bit annoying—it's just hype wherever you go. Is it seventy thousand or thirteen thousand? This betting method is pointless; better to wait and see next month's macro data. I reserve my opinion on the idea that the four-year cycle is invalid; history always repeats itself.

View OriginalReply0

ApeEscapeArtist

· 11h ago

$250,000 people really dare to say that, but the actual entry speed is the key. --- A slow bull market sounds comfortable, dollar-cost averaging is steady and brainless, but the real variable is still the attitude of the Federal Reserve. --- The institutions say different things, but there are really only two paths—either take off or oscillate; anyway, no one can make money. --- It's good to be optimistic, but repeatedly bouncing between 70,000 and 130,000—who can stand that? --- The capital tsunami sounds impressive, but will the treasury gold really come in? That’s the real question. --- Instead of guessing the price, it’s better to watch liquidity—that’s a lesson I’ve taken to heart. --- Halving, ETFs, rate cuts are all here—still hitting the brakes? That’s a bit timid. --- Just dollar-cost average, anyway, many people lose by betting on the price.

View OriginalReply0

UnluckyValidator

· 11h ago

Institutions are also each saying different things—$250,000 or $70,000—and it's unclear who is more accurate. It's better to be honest and stick to regular investments; after all, we can't beat the Federal Reserve in a gamble.

View OriginalReply0